Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 193 Md. 95 - Eberwein v. Eberwein

Eberwein v. Eberwein’s Empirical Analysis

1949

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
2
states following
October 2001
most recently cited

41 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently October 2001 · most notably Ballan v. Ballan (1969), 15 Md. App. 503 - Colburn v. Colburn (1972)

41 state decisions

1801949195019601970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Kruse v. Kruse · Singewald v. Singewald · Schwartz v. Schwartz · Collins v. Collinss · Bradshaw v. Bradshaw

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It is settled that conduct of one spouse which compels the other to leave may justify a divorce to that other on the ground of desertion, even though the conduct may not justify a divorce on the ground of cruelty. Harding v. Harding, supra ( 22 Md. 337 ); Singewald v. Singewald, 165 Md. 136, 137 , 166 A. 441 . It must, however, render impossible the continuation of matrimonial cohabitation with safety, health, and self-respect. Schwartz v. Schwartz, 158 Md. 80, 90 , 148 A. 259 .” Id. at 653, 22 A. 2d at 478 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It has been stated many times by this Court that a single act of violence will ordinarily not justify a divorce on the grounds of cruelty. Marital neglect, indifference, failure to provide as freely as the wife may desire in dress or conveniences, sallies of passion, harshness, rudeness and use of profane and abusive language do not constitute cruelty as grounds for a divorce. Only danger to life, limb, or health will constitute such cruelty. (Citing cases)” 193 Md. at 101, 102 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.